Erich von Daniken RIP

[arthwollipot]

Neither are coherent, Hubbard was even a third rate pulp writer*, none of his crap ever made sense!

Nobody's disputing that.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Nobody's disputing that.

Maybe he was a first rate pulp writer?

I do remember reading a couple of his earlier novels and finding them not so bad. But, I have to admit, I can't remember any names now.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Maybe he was a first rate pulp writer?

I do remember reading a couple of his earlier novels and finding them not so bad. But, I have to admit, I can't remember any names now.

Now I remember one.

Typewriter in the Sky - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It had generally good reviews and is considered a seminal work.

Whether it presaged $cientology is a question for the reader.

 

[Darat]

Now I remember one.

Typewriter in the Sky - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It had generally good reviews and is considered a seminal work.
Whether it presaged $cientology is a question for the reader.

Mmmmm not really, remember it is still hard to get genuine criticism of his works these days, have a look at the earlier, contemporary reviews and commentaries.

It is a pulp quality story, now don't get me wrong, I don't criticise pulp for being pulp - I love the old pulps, literally at this moment I am listening to the complete tales of Jules De Grandin stories by Seabury Quinn (volume 5) currently have "Lords of the Ghostlands" playing - but Hubbard wasn't even one of the good writers writing pulp. That's why I called him a 3rd rate pulp writer.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Mmmmm not really, remember it is still hard to get genuine criticism of his works these days, have a look at the earlier, contemporary reviews and commentaries.

It is a pulp quality story, now don't get me wrong, I don't criticise pulp for being pulp - I love the old pulps, literally at this moment I am listening to the complete tales of Jules De Grandin stories by Seabury Quinn (volume 5) currently have "Lords of the Ghostlands" playing - but Hubbard wasn't even one of the good writers writing pulp. That's why I called him a 3rd rate pulp writer.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

ISTR I first read about Typewriter in a positive review in Damon Knight's In Search of Wonder in the late 1950s. I read the book as a result.

 

[Spektator]

{"Getting clear"} means something different though. In Dianetics being "clear" means that you are rid of all of your harmful engrams and can go about your life with an unburdened mind. "Clear" in Scientology means that you are rid of your harmful engrams, which are actually the spirits of ancient dead aliens, and this frees your mind to work to its full potential, which is superpowers.

The superpowers cost a good deal extra, of course. Though your payment plan may be stretched over a few dozen reincarnations.

 

[stanfr]

Regarding Von Daniken. I actually give fairly high marks to Chariots of the Gods. Of course the book is utter rot in terms of science of any kind. But I have found it great fun to read. It is sort of the Plan Nine from Outer Space of archeology books. Utter garbage but so damn fun!! Of course this book inspired the Plan Nine from Outer Space of documentaries! (Actually more than one!!)

I saw it in the theater when it first came out--one of the first films I can remember seeing. Just the fact that I remember it clearly (and remember being fascinated by it) tells me it was one of the things that got me interested in the paranormal, which in turn sent me down the road to skepticism (via NOVA and Randi...)